Tuesday, 27 October 2015

I always find it hard to
look past the fact Milo looks startlingly like a heroin-addict Princess
Di, but that to one side he is awesomely on point here, just hammering
in the nails on the head one after the other.

Monday, 27 April 2015

"BOSTON—Saying
that such a dialogue was essential to the college’s academic mission,
Trescott University president Kevin Abrams confirmed Monday that the
school encourages a lively exchange of one idea. “As an institution of
higher learning, we recognize that it’s inevitable that certain
contentious topics will come up from time to time, and when they do, we
want to create an atmosphere where both students and faculty feel
comfortable voicing a single homogeneous opinion,” said Abrams, adding
that no matter the subject, anyone on campus is always welcome to add
their support to the accepted consensus. “Whether it’s a discussion of a
national political issue or a concern here on campus, an open forum in
which one argument is uniformly reinforced is crucial for maintaining
the exceptional learning environment we have cultivated here.” Abrams
told reporters that counseling resources were available for any student
made uncomfortable by the viewpoint."

I’ve always loved The Onion anyway, but this rather wonderful savaging
of feminist indoctrination and rooms set aside full of play-doh and soft
toys for anyone ‘triggered’ by the mere mention of an opposing point of
view is very timely, what with Christina Hoff-Sommers’ university
lecture last week to a bunch of brainwashed ninnies with the collective
mental age of 5.

Saturday, 18 April 2015

by Gal Saad, professor and author of The Consuming Instinct and The Evolutionary Bases of Consumption
Last April, I delivered an invited lecture at Wellesley College
titled "How Thought Police Regulate the Free Exchange of Ideas." One of
the topics that I covered in my talk was the recent phenomenon of having
trigger warnings
in university courses, namely the idea that some topics should
necessitate an alert prior to being broached lest some audience member
might be disturbed or offended by exposure to such material. As an avid
animal lover, I always recoil in horror at the sight of television
advertisements that depict animal cruelty (e.g., the ad in which Sarah
McLachlan sings her terribly depressing song). As such, I understand the
spirit of trigger warnings when coupled with uniquely gruesome or
troublesome issues. The problem though is that trigger warnings seem to
cover an endless list of possible "triggering" topics. In preparation
for my Wellesley lecture, I visited several websites in order to cull
topics that are considered to be "trigger-worthy." Here is a list of
items most of which stem from Kyriarchy & Privilege 101:
• Sex (even if consensual)
• Pregnancy, childbirth
• Addiction, alcohol, drug use, needles
• Death, dying, suicide, injuries, descriptions and/or images of medical procedures
• Racism, classism, sexism, sizeism, ableism, other "isms"
• Bullying, homophobia, transphobia
• Blood, vomit, insects, snakes, spiders, slimy things, corpses, skulls, skeletons
• Swearing, slurs (including words such as "stupid" or "dumb")
• Abuse (physical, mental, emotional, verbal, sexual), child abuse, rape, kidnapping
• Descriptions and/or images of violence or warfare, Nazi paraphernalia
• Anything that might elicit intrusive thoughts in OCD sufferers
Let's examine my own scientific work in light of the latter list of "trigger-worthy" topics. I tackle the evolutionary roots of consumer behavior,
which include subjects as varied as human mating, sexual signaling,
dark side consumption (pathological gambling, compulsive buying, eating
disorders, pornographic addiction), intra-sexual competition (which
includes male-on-male violence), among countless other "triggering"
topics. I've also authored papers on Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy (a form of child abuse), suicide, and OCD. When I discuss the difference between proximate and ultimate scientific explanations, I use the example of pregnancy sickness.
I've supervised a thesis on sexual, moral, and pathogenic disgust, and
I recently submitted a grant application, which examines in part the
links between pathogenic density and various consumer phenomena. I
mention all of these topics to highlight the fact that nearly every
imaginable issue worthy of scientific exploration could conceivably fall
under the "trigger warning" rubric.

Trigger warnings are an instantiation of the West's zeitgeist of
perpetual offense and victimhood that defines much of public discourse.
If the truth might hurt someone's feelings or cause discomfort, well
then we need to cuddle them whilst in a communal fetal position. In one
of my recent YouTube clips titled Malala Versus Trigger Warnings,
I contrasted the heroism of Malala Yousafzai (recipient of the 2014
Nobel Peace Prize) to the pampered reality of university students who
require "trigger warning" protection from central realities of the human
condition. Malala was fighting for the rights of girls to be educated
in a harsh environment wherein they face endemic actual violence. Contrast their reality with that of university students on North American campuses that require protection from discussions of violence in safe classroom settings.

There are justifiable case-by-case situations wherein an educator might
exhibit targeted sensitivity to a student's unique circumstances. This
is humane and laudable. In most instances though, trigger warnings are
not a manifestation of justified empathy but are symptomatic of an
ailing culture. Empires implode from within due to their own excesses.
Trigger warnings are part of the West's debauchery of self-indulgent
victimhood.

Friday, 6 March 2015

While researching something else I happened to stumble upon the current Wikipedia entry for Misandry, which, to my surprise, and for the first time in its history, is a real-life, honest-to-god, factually accurate, fully-functional and informative encyclopedia entry. Imagine that.

This time last year it was a mess, ever since university 'Gender Studies' classes began giving extra credit to any student who spent time manipulating online resources to be 'more in line' with feminist dogma. Thankfully, a month or two ago some of the worst offenders were banned from Wikipedia and ordinary business began for as far as I know the first time.

This might well be just a bubble of sanity, and one which may not last, but the momentous nature of the moment makes me want to freeze it for future reference in either the dark, Orwellian age of totalitarian censorship or the free age of light and love towards which we are all borne.

Tuesday, 17 February 2015

Dr. Helen Smith, author of Men on Strike, discusses the state of the
young American male with PJTV's Andrew Klavan, Bill Whittle and Matt
Orr. Are men shunning marriage because of the economy, or do they have
alternatives to marriage, like porn and easy sex? Could it be that women
simply giving-up on the hopes of having a relationship with the current
pool of men in America?

This is amazing, I've never heard these ideas expressed on TV before. Highly recommended.

The Librarian

“I have no doubt that, someday, the distortion of truth by the radical feminists of our time will be seen to have been the greatest intellectual crime of the second half of the twentieth century. At the present time, however, we still live under the aegis of that crime, and calling attention to it is an act of great moral courage” - Professor Howard S. Schwartz, of Oakland University in Michigan, USA, 2001